By Christian Zibreg on Nov 9, 2012
Federal District Judge Lucy Koh will look into claims of Samsung’s attorneys that a foreman in the Apple v. Samsung lawsuit concealed information during the jury selection process. Attorneys for the South Korean conglomerate argue that that jury foreman Velvin Hogan didn’t disclose he’d been sued by Seagate, which led him to file for personal bankruptcy in 1993. Samsung also states that it has a “substantial strategic relationship” with Seagate and insists Hogan should have informed the court about the case… Read More
By Ed Sutherland on Nov 9, 2012
Hot on the heels of the $368 million payout in the FaceTime suit, patent holding firm VirnetX is trolling Apple again, this time with claims that both the iPhone 5 and iPad mini infringe upon four patents. Both devices, along with the latest iPod and Macs, were added to the lawsuit. Just like the Facetime case could result in a ban of the iPhone 4S, this latest wrinkle might put sales of Apple’s newest products in jeopardy ahead of the fast-approaching holiday season… Read More
By Christian Zibreg on Nov 6, 2012
Apple’s just expanded its second lawsuit against Samsung, seeking to include the South Korean company’s 10.1-inch Galaxy Note tablet on a list of allegedly infringing products. In addition, the iPhone maker has alleged that Google’s Android version 4.1 software, also known as Jelly Bean, infringes upon its patents. This could be the first time Apple directly sued Android over alleged patent infringement, though it wasn’t immediately clear whether Apple’s complaint involved the entire Android OS or just Samsung’s TouchWiz overlay. The case is scheduled for trial in 2014. And so it continues… Read More
By Christian Zibreg on Nov 5, 2012
Though it hinted it was tiring of patent wars and even dropped its ITC patent infringement claims against Apple (the move some deciphered as a gesture of goodwill), Motorola could be off the hook as Google was quoted as saying Monday that that a Wisconsin federal court tossed Apple’s “patent lawsuit with prejudice” out of the window.
The search monster relayed willingness of its subsidiary Motorola to license its patents portfolio at a reasonable and non-discriminatory rate “in line with industry standards”, court documents have it. Apple in a filing last week hinted it would accept a license at a court-determined rate of up to $1 per iPhone on FRAND terms. Also indicative, the two companies in August demonstrated ability to resolve differences, having signed a patent licensing agreement in Germany… Read More
By Oliver Haslam on Nov 5, 2012
The subject of large companies paying their taxes is something of a hot button topic in the UK right now, which is why the likes of Starbucks have already found themselves thrown to the wolves over their accounting practices. Today, the latest multinational firm to be on the rack is Apple, with the news that it paid just 2% tax on its profits outside the US last year, leaving international taxmen considerably out of pocket.
Paperwork filed in the United States shows that Apple paid around 2% tax on its pre-tax earnings of $36.8B outside the US. That’s down on the 2.5% paid the year before.
Oddly though, it’s all perfectly legal… Read More
By Sebastien Page on Nov 3, 2012
Apple just published a statement on its UK website to correct a previous apology that had been found inaccurate by the Court of Appeal of England and Wales. The statement can be found at the bottom of Apple UK website‘s home page, and links to a longer statement acknowledging that Samsung didn’t copy the iPad.
This “updated” statement comes several days after Apple published a public apology on its website, at the request of the Court… Read More
By Christian Zibreg on Nov 2, 2012
The South Korean conglomerate Samsung will get another crack at questioning Phil Schiller, Apple’s SVP of Worldwide Marketing, as part of the appeal proceedings concerning the Apple v. Samsung monster suit, a California court ordered yesterday following a request from Samsung lawyers. Apple must make Schiller available for another deposition this coming Monday. The massive lawsuit culminated when the jury handed the verdict, awarding Apple more than $1 billion in damages (the company wants more) while also ruling it did not infringe upon any of the patents held by its South Korean rival… Read More
By Cody Lee on Nov 2, 2012
Apple has lost a fairly significant court case in Mexico this week. A Mexico City Judge has denied the company’s injunction request that would have allowed it to continue selling iPhone-branded products in the country.
Apparently, the “iPhone” moniker sounds too phonetically similar to iFone, a brand belonging to a Mexican telecommunications company. And the similarity is enough that Apple could be banned from using the name in the region… Read More
By Christian Zibreg on Nov 2, 2012
As required by the UK court of appeal, Apple today published a public apology to Samsung in The Guardian newspaper, following the previous U.K. ruling that Samsung tablets did not copy the iPad. Snarky Apple yesterday published a public notice of the ruling on its web site and ran into trouble because it cunningly inserted a paragraph quoting the Judge on how consumers can’t confuse the Galaxy Tab with the iPad because “they’re not as cool”, prompting Judge Robin Jacob to order that the edits be made within 24 hours.
The iPhone maker has pulled the notice upon request by Samsung, which argued that Apple’s version of the notice gave the “impression that the UK court is out of step with other courts”. The company did not update its web site with a revised version of the notice at post time. I take it Apple employees are busy launching the iPad in 34 countries so nobody can update the web site… Read More
By Ed Sutherland on Nov 1, 2012
Note to Apple: UK judges don’t get American snarkiness. The UK Court of Appeals Thursday told the iPhone maker its recent apology to Samsung was “incorrect” and required a new notice on the website “acknowledging the inaccurate comments.” At issue: comments from the trial’s first ruling in which the judge declared Samsung’s tablet “not as cool.”
Judge Robin Jacob ordered the changes to Apple’s website be made within 24 hours, rejecting the Cupertino, Calif. firm’s request for 14 days to make the edit. “This is Apple. They cannot put something on their website?” Jacob reportedly said… Read More
By Christian Zibreg on Oct 31, 2012
In a response to Motorola’s motion from yesterday seeking clarification on essential wireless patents (which include both cellular and WiFi standards), Apple has formally acknowledged its willingness to accept a license at a court-determined rate of up to $1 per iPhone through a license agreement on fair, reasonable and non-discriminatory (FRAND) terms.
The figure entails worldwide sales of covered products, the iPhone maker said. Apple’s position on FRAND licensing is that the industry should set FRAND rates in order to prevent companies asserting wireless standards-essential patents against its rivals by jacking up prices.
Motorola, which is now a wholly-owned Google subsidiary, wrote in the filing that Microsoft’s FRAND contract case had explicitly committed to the conclusion of a license agreement on court-ordered terms. Is there finally an end in sight to this patent mess? Read More
By Cody Lee on Oct 26, 2012
A week ago, Apple tried appealing a recent ruling by the High Court in London that Samsung’s Galaxy Tab didn’t infringe on its design patents. As you may recall, this is the same case where the presiding Judge ordered Apple to run advertisements stating that Samsung didn’t copy the iPad.
Well, Apple lost that appeal. And this morning, it made good on its orders by posting a notice on the ruling to its UK website… Read More
By Cody Lee on Oct 25, 2012
On July 26, 2010, the Library of Congress ruled that under the DMCA (Digital Millennium Copyright Act), jailbreaking was legal. This was a big deal at the time, as prior to the ruling the legality of jailbreaking was a bit of a mystery.
The decision was part of a list of DMCA exemptions, which unfortunately just expired. So the Library announced a new batch of exemptions today. And although jailbreaking is still legal, it appears there are some significant caveats… Read More
By Christian Zibreg on Oct 25, 2012
UK-based Apple Corps, which handles business dealings of the legendary Liverpool-based pop group The Beatles, has finally ended its dispute with Apple, Inc. of Cupertino, California over use of the Apple Corps’ Granny Smith logo, which was originally owned by The Beatles. According to a new report, Apple for an undisclosed sum has secured rights to use the Apple Corps logo in association with music, computers, entertainment, multimedia and more. Matter of fact, Apple, Inc. has actually gained entire ownership over all trademarks which included or are related to the word “Apple”… Read More
By Christian Zibreg on Oct 24, 2012
The South Korean conglomerate Samsung has become the target of another antitrust investigation concerning suspected abuse of FRAND-pledged standard-essential patents, which the company asserted against Apple in litigation and recently used to sue the Cupertino, California firm over 4G wireless technology utilized for the iPhone 5.
This time around, the United States Department of Justice is preliminary probing Samsung, which could lead to a full-blown investigation. If it finds an unlawful use of standard-essential wireless patents on Samsung’s part, it’ll clear Apple of a possible U.S. import ban sought by Samsung because the iPhone maker had refused to accept a Samsung-suggested per-device royalty fee of 2.4 percent (Apple wanted to pay half a cent per device)… Read More
By Christian Zibreg on Oct 17, 2012
We know Apple often patents stuff just so rivals couldn’t patent the same invention. That’s what other companies are doing as well. But Apple, more than any other company, depends on being able to protect its ideas and leverage patents to prevent copycat products from eating into its sales. The iPhone maker has been on somewhat of a patent spree lately and today has been granted a key patent for design of the original iPad tablet computer… Read More
By Christian Zibreg on Oct 15, 2012
If you bought Walter Isaacson’s official Steve Jobs biography, titles from the New York Times bestseller list or other iBooks from Apple (or e-books from other retailers) between April 1, 2010 and May 21, 2012, you may be eligible for your share of the $65 million settlement in the e-book price fixing scandal. Amazon and Apple started emailing customers that the settlement has been reached between the State Attorneys General and book publishers Hachette, HarperCollins and Simon & Schuster.
Though Apple has not been sued in this case, the company is “assisting in providing this notice as a service to its customers”. Companies will compensate eligible customers from $0.30 to $1.32 per e-book as the named publishers already paid $69 million into a settlement fund… Read More
By Christian Zibreg on Oct 11, 2012
Google’s pricey $12.5 acquisition of handset maker Motorola Mobility didn’t change the dynamics of patent wars as Google hoped it would. Recently, Microsoft and Apple scored a major win in a patent dispute in Germany, forcing Google’s Motorola subsidiary to pull all of its Android-based smartphones and tablets from store shelves in the country.
Luck continues to be in short supply at Mountain View, California. Today, the Windows maker has expanded the Motorola patent case to include Google Maps for Android, specifically naming Google as a defendant.
As the public fight between Google and Microsoft gets uglier, Google faces a real possibility of Google Maps becoming unavailable in Germany as early as next spring. Ouch! Read More
By Christian Zibreg on Oct 11, 2012
The Galaxy Nexus, a Samsung-made smartphone providing so-called stock Android experience (one free of carrier crapware and skinning) may soon be back on store shelves in the United States as the country’s appeals court warned that a “district court abused its discretion”.
Back in June, U.S. Judge Lucy Koh granted Apple’s request for a preliminary injunction. The appeals court now reversed Apple’s injunction warning that the iPhone maker did not prove people bought Samsung’s phone because of the infringing technology.
The appeals court has sent the case back to a lower California court for reconsideration… Read More
By Ed Sutherland on Oct 11, 2012
Apple Thursday won a temporary reprieve from a South Korean court, keeping the Cupertino, Calif. company’s iPhone and iPad on store shelves in that country. A Seoul judge whose court in August ruled products by both Apple and Samsung should be yanked from stores, approved Apple’s request for a stay while the U.S. firm appeals.
According to Bloomberg, Samsung has yet to file for a similar injunction. The original ruling by the Seoul Central District Court also banned sales of the Galaxy Nexus, Galaxy Tab and Galaxy Tab 10.1. The court ruled both Apple and Samsung guilty of violating each others’ patents… Read More